From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of McAvoy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 20, 1906
112 App. Div. 377 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)

Opinion

April 20, 1906.

Leonard B. Smith [ Frank Julian Price with him on the brief], for the appellant.

No appearance or brief for the respondent.


By paragraph 2 of her will the testator provided: "I give and bequeath unto Rev. Father Guhl, of St. Alphonsus Church on Kent street, Brooklyn Borough, N.Y. City, or in the event of his death, to his successors as pastor of said Church, the sum of eight hundred (800) Dollars, to be used in saying eight hundred (800) low masses, as follows: two hundred thereof for Henry J. Riley; two hundred thereof for Mary J. McAvoy; two hundred thereof for James A. McAvoy, and two hundred thereof for Jane Riley." The sole question presented is whether this sum of $800 is subject to a transfer tax. The Tax Law (Laws of 1896, chap. 908, art. 10, as amd.) does not specially exempt such a bequest, and the legacy in question seems to me a transfer by will and as such taxable. (See Matter of Gould, 156 N.Y. 423.) I do not see how it can be held that such a provision is for funeral expenses. Certainly the bequest for masses to be said for others than the testator cannot be for the funeral expenses of the testator. So far as the masses to be said for the testator are concerned, it is quite clear that she did not contemplate that the bequest was for her funeral expenses, inasmuch as she provided by the 1st paragraph of her will as follows: "I direct that all my just debts, funeral and testamentary expenses be paid as soon after my decease as may be." (See Matter of Black, 1 Con. 477.) A mass is not peculiarly a part of a funeral service like unto the office for the dead. It is the sacrament of the Eucharist, and a low mass is one said and not sung. (Cent. Dict.) In the religion of the Holy Roman Church masses are celebrated for the good of those who are dead, but in no sense is a mass so celebrated necessarily a part of the funeral service. I think that the conclusion reached by the learned surrogate in Matter of Black ( supra) was correct.

It follows that the order must be reversed, and the order assessing the tax modified by assessing a tax at the rate of five per cent upon the legacy.

WOODWARD, GAYNOR and RICH, JJ., concurred.

Order of the Surrogate's Court of Kings county reversed, with costs, and order assessing the tax modified by assessing a tax at the rate of five per cent upon the legacy.


Summaries of

Matter of McAvoy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 20, 1906
112 App. Div. 377 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)
Case details for

Matter of McAvoy

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Transfer Tax upon the Estate of MARY J. McAVOY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 20, 1906

Citations

112 App. Div. 377 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)
98 N.Y.S. 437

Citing Cases

Matter of Nolan

The statutory definition of funeral expenses includes a reasonable amount expended for "suitable church or…

Matter of Maverick

( Matter of Vinot's Estate, 7 N.Y. Supp. 517, cited in Matter of Edgerton, supra.) If the cost of a burial…